Frett v. Jacquez et al

Filing
61

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
10
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
11
12
MALCOLM FRETT,
13
14
15
Plaintiff,
v.
F. JACQUEZ, et al.,
16
Defendants.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
No. C 10-3733 RMW (PR)
ORDER DIRECTING CLERK
TO RE-ISSUE SUMMONS;
GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S
MOTION FOR EXTENSION
OF TIME
17
Plaintiff filed a pro se civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On November 30,
18
2010, the court ordered service of the stated cognizable claims upon named defendants. On
19
December 27, 2010, the court received two summonses which were returned unexecuted.
20
Specifically, because the facility had no information on defendant Correctional Lt. L. Osborne,
21
and defendant Correctional Officer C. Vasquez had been transferred, the facility would not
22
accept service for either defendant. On June 24, 2011, the court directed plaintiff to provide
23
more identifying and location information regarding the unserved defendants. The court also
24
requested assistance from the litigation coordinator at Pelican Bay State Prison to provide such
25
information.
26
At some point, counsel for defendants entered his appearance on behalf of defendant
27
Vasquez, thereby waiving service. Then, on October 3, 2011, counsel for defendants sent a letter
28
Order Directing Clerk to Re-Issue Summons; Granting Plaintiff’s Motion for Extension of Time
P:\PRO-SE\SJ.Rmw\CR.10\Frett733reserve.wpd
1
to the court indicating that K. Osborne at Pelican Bay State Prison, rather than L. Osborne, was
2
the likely intended defendant. For the foregoing reasons, the court hereby orders as follows:
3
The clerk shall issue summons and the United States Marshal shall serve,
4
without prepayment of fees, copies of the complaint in this matter (docket no. 1), all
5
attachments thereto, and copy of this order on defendant Correctional Lt. K. Osborne at
6
Pelican Bay State Prison.
7
Plaintiff has also filed a third motion for extension of time to file his opposition to
8
defendants’ motion to dismiss. Plaintiff’s motion is GRANTED. His opposition is due on or
9
before November 29, 2001. Defendants shall file their reply no later than fifteen days thereafter.
10
11
12
13
No further requests for extension will be favored absent exigent circumstances.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATED:
RONALD M. WHYTE
United States District Judge
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
MALCOLM FRETT,
Case Number: CV10-03733 RMW
Plaintiff,
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
v.
F JACQUEZ et al,
Defendant.
/
I, the undersigned, hereby certify that I am an employee in the Office of the Clerk, U.S. District
Court, Northern District of California.
That on October 25, 2011, I SERVED a true and correct copy(ies) of the attached, by placing
said copy(ies) in a postage paid envelope addressed to the person(s) hereinafter listed, by
depositing said envelope in the U.S. Mail, or by placing said copy(ies) into an inter-office
delivery receptacle located in the Clerk's office.
Malcolm Frett T37449
High Desert State Prison
C8-101-P
PO Box 3030
Susanville, CA 96127
Dated: October 25, 2011
Richard W. Wieking, Clerk
By: Jackie Lynn Garcia, Deputy Clerk

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.